Congress

Sen. Josh Hawley falsely says FBI ‘tapped’ senators’ phones during Jack Smith probe

Published

12 months ago

October 7, 2025

Sen. Josh Hawley falsely claimed Tuesday that newly disclosed records revealed that the FBI “tapped” the phones of eight sitting U.S. senators during special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation of President Donald Trump’s bid to subvert the 2020 election.

Hawley was describing an FBI document, publicly released Monday by Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley, that referenced a “preliminary toll analysis” of nine lawmakers. Grassley underscored that the records revealed a subset of calls made and received by those lawmakers and did not reveal the content of those calls — only the time and duration.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, during her Tuesday testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, did not correct Hawley’s characterization of the records. Bondi said she had spoken with FBI Director Kash Patel “at length” about the records and could not discuss the details “for very good reason.”

It’s unclear why the FBI reviewed the phone records of the particular set of senators included on the list. Though some, like Hawley, were deeply engaged in efforts to block the certification of Joe Biden’s win in the 2020 election, others appeared less involved.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Dems skip DC with wind in their sails

Published

5 minutes ago

October 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The Senate wrapped up its work late Wednesday night, and lawmakers in both chambers won’t be back until after midterm voters pass judgment.

And Chuck Schumer is growing increasingly confident they’ll hand the Senate to Democrats

“Here’s how I’d sum up the election: Can enormous amounts of Republican money beat a Democratic enormous advantage in much better candidates and a much better political climate?” the minority leader said in an interview in his office Wednesday.

“I think we win,” he added.

Schumer’s optimism — saying Democrats’ have the “wind in their sails” — reflects his members’ growing bullishness as they head home for a final sprint to convince voters to give them back the majority. The Senate recessed Wednesday night after confirming President Donald Trump’s Labor secretary, but Democrats stayed united in a string of politically tricky votes before leaving.

“It certainly feels like it’s going to be a wave election, and not for good reasons,” Sen. Chris Murphy said. “This president’s domestic and foreign policy has gone off the rails.”

There’s division among Democratic party strategists on whether to spend these final weeks focusing on the states viewed as most likely to flip — like Alaska, Ohio or Iowa — or put resources into so-called reach states like Mississippi, South Carolina or Florida.

Schumer declined to weigh in, but said that Democrats would do “whatever it takes to win” and that he expects to spend the next five weeks fundraising.

“We have lots of different paths to victory, and we’re not going to turn any of them down,” he said.

Also hanging over the midterm elections are questions about Schumer’s future — but the New York Democrat said that he is “running for re-election for leader. Period.”

Republicans, meanwhile, are still hopeful that they can hold onto their majority even if it’s narrower. Much of the midterms map runs through states that Trump won previously.

“Of course we are,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said about keeping control of the chamber as he left the building Wednesday. “Thank you for asking.”

What else we’re watching:

— PERMITTING DEAL FACES HOUSE BUZZSAW — The Senate’s newly announced bipartisan permitting reform package is set to hit a wall in the House, where key lawmakers aren’t rushing to endorse it. House Natural Resources ranking member Jared Huffman warned Wednesday most House Democrats will not support the Senate’s permitting legislation as written, urging lawmakers to resume negotiations after the midterm elections when they are “likely to have a far better negotiating position.” And House Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie, a key GOP negotiator, has yet to take a position on the Senate deal.

—RASKIN WANTS TRUMP AD PROBE — House Judiciary’s top Democrat is demanding federal inquiries into the amount of taxpayer money that was used by the Trump administration for a TV ad blitz endorsing the president ahead of the midterms. Rep. Jamie Raskin, who is poised to lead the panel if Democrats flip the chamber, and Rep. George Whitesides, wrote to the Government Accountability Office Wednesday asking them to investigate the “source, accounts and total amount of taxpayer funds used” to produce and distribute the ads. The pair of lawmakers also asked the Office of Special Counsel to investigate whether the ads “constitute a violation of the Hatch Act” and to “determine who should be held accountable.”

Nico Portuondo and Chris Marquette contributed to this report.

Congress

Raskin leads calls for federal investigation into Trump PSA’s

Published

5 minutes ago

October 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee is demanding federal inquiries into the amount of taxpayer money used to furnish a television ad blitz propping up President Donald Trump ahead of the midterms.

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, who is poised to lead the panel if Democrats win the majority in November, joined California Democratic Rep. George Whitesides in sending a letter to the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Special Counsel. It asks the GAO to investigate the “source, accounts, and total amount of taxpayer funds used by the Executive Office of the President to produce and distribute this advertisement across major television markets and official White House social media channels.”

The lawmakers also ask the Office of Special Counsel to investigate whether the ads “paid for by millions of dollars of taxpayer funds, constitute a violation of the Hatch Act, and determine who should be held accountable.”

The ads, which so far have run during NFL games and flagship Sunday news shows, depict Trump in a powerful and effective light, with glimpses of him posing for the camera, denigrating the free press and denouncing communism. Each includes the phrase, “paid for by the U.S. government.”

“These ads constitute an illegal use of taxpayer funds, perhaps best demonstrated by the fact that they are virtually identical to the ones Donald Trump used during his 2024 presidential campaign, and in fact use the same footage and the same inept ideological messaging,” Raskin and Whitesides contend.

Other congressional Democrats have also reached out to the administration in recent days to express outrage and ask basic questions about how the ads were derived and funded.

Sens. Patty Murray of Washington and Chris Murphy of Connecticut — the top Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee and the appropriations subcommittee on Homeland Security, respectively — have written to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin regarding reports that the agency has redirected $20 million in funding originally intended for Customs and Border Protection to “bankroll the obscene political ads.”

A White House spokesperson called the TV spots “public service announcements” and said they are designed to remind “Americans to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending, at home, at our borders, and abroad. The ad is educational and unapologetically patriotic. We should be proud of our country.”

A spokesperson for DHS said the agency “follows all applicable rules for contracting decisions and keeps all decision makers informed” and that “all contracting decisions are made in accordance with applicable law.”

The Office of the Special Counsel confirmed it received the letter and declined comment.

A spokesperson for GAO did not respond to a request for comment.

Congress

Bipartisan Senate duo drops new data center bills

Published

5 minutes ago

October 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A bipartisan Senate duo is rolling out two new data center bills one day after Democrats rejected a House-passed measure designed to shield ratepayers from costs associated with the facilities.

The measures from Sens. John Curtis (R-Utah) and Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) would aim to provide people with more information about the data centers being built in their backyards amid growing backlash against the nationwide proliferation brought on by the artificial intelligence industry boom.

One bill would establish a program within the Department of Energy to give communities access to technical expertise to better understand the costs and benefits of proposed data center developments. The other would require federal reporting on the environmental impacts of large data centers that consume at least 50 megawatts of power every day.

“Americans are rightly skeptical when a large company tells them not to worry about the impacts of a new data center in their community,” Curtis said in a statement, shared first with Blue Light News. “The answer to that distrust is transparency.”

Blunt Rochester added in a separate statement that people have “legitimate concerns” about energy and water usage coming from data centers, and that her bills with Curtis would “ensure communities have a say in how these projects affect their quality of life.”

Curtis and Blunt Rochester, who both serve on the Senate Commerce Committee, recently teamed up on a letter to Chair Ted Cruz calling for hearings and forums to discuss the perils of rapidly-advancing AI technology. They have not yet received a response.

It’s not clear what the path might be for their new data center bills in the current Congress. While support from members of both parties could bolster the effort, neither measure would contain forcing mechanisms to bring down costs passed on from data centers to consumers — a rallying cry for Democrats ahead of the midterms.

Most Senate Democrats on Wednesday blocked the Ratepayer Protection Act, legislation that passed overwhelmingly in the House earlier in September, from going to President Donald Trump’s desk because it would simply encourage tech companies to pay for data center infrastructure.

Democrats said the bill, championed in the Senate by vulnerable GOP Sen. John Husted of Ohio, was ultimately “toothless” in failing to go far enough to ensure energy prices were curbed for consumers.